Morey would spend more money to buy or trade for those valuable picks in 2011 and 2012. Giving up valuable future assets just to shed salary is not something Morey would consider. Plus Jefferies could probably be had for good assets at the trade deadline from teams looking to get in the Melo sweepstakes.
The Knicks are definitely the drunk chick at the party: giving it up for nothing and never knowing when to quit.
Martin - SG - our starter Brooks - PG - small PG at that. Budinger - SF Taylor - SG - unproven except that he can get to the hole in SL. No outside shot. A longshot to stick IMO. Ariza - SF - our starter. Battier - SF - done IMO. You can play people out of position by 1 or even 2 numbers sometimes but you will pay the price unless you have the reincarnation of Magic Johnson. Maybe for a few minutes in a few games you can get by depending on the matchup but right now we have 1 starter SG in Martin and a D+ league SG player in Taylor. And if Martin goes down we are just as sunk as if Yao goes down. That is why I said the backup SG as a weakness. And by moving people out of position to cover that gap only proves the point.
We know that Hill is sane, a solid citizen and can play center. Randolph might ... might, mind you ... be a more talented player than Hill, but I question his dedication and mental stability. Also, I still remember how much Yao wanted to squish his head like a pimple a couple of years ago.
While I don't think this is going to happen and would be a mistake for the Rocks if it did, I think people have neglected another reason the Knicks would like to do it, besides getting rid of a headcase in Curry. It's easier to move two smaller expiring contracts in a deal(s), then one large contract (Curry).
Concur. I wish we could work a deal with the Grizz to get Xavier Henry. Is Memphis still having trouble signing him? They just might go for Jermaine Taylor and our 2012 pick (not the Knick's 2012 pick).
Who do you think would be better at moving a bigger contract though, the Knicks or Morey? Therefore, I think Curry has a (slightly) higher value with the Rockets.
Posted a response to her JJ Vid on YT asking her if she was excited about NY's interest in getting him back. Response: @Orion025 hmmmm, excited is not quite the word. sent her a thread link, hopefully she'll show up :grin:
Battier has played SG a lot in his career and on defense is great at it....you would not be hurt playing him at the backup SG position. I don't think we are weak at SG at all....lots of options....and whichever one is better for that night's matchup will probably get the call. DD
Before we signed Brad Miller, Curry might have been an acceptable risk. Now, we don't need the aggravation. Jeffries and Battier give us more trade value and more flexibility plus they are better teammates in the interim. Curry is a dish best served ... to someone else.
As someone who finds the distinction between SF and SG more or less arbitary, completely disagree. From my perspective, it's the talent and how well they work together, not some positional label that determines things. Battriza didn't work not because both were SFs, it didn't work simply because they were similar players with similar strengths and weaknesses. Similarily, if we theoretically could trade Martin for Durant or Melo, we wouldn't worry about who would fill the SG spot because those two could do it as they could work alongside Ariza better then Battier can. The important thing is to get the two most talented wings, and as Battier and Budinger are better players than Henry, I'd rather use them.
That was a really good post about jeffries. Thats pretty much what i have said about the guy. His versitility is huge and a great asset. He is the kind of guy u need if u play against odom,dirk,lewis and those other hybrid types. The only way or reason i would do a deal for curry is to get randolph. I think randolph is a special talent. I see him as a josh smith type of forward. i think he can play the 3 and be a stat stuffer like ak-47 was before he started getting injured.He could use the offense to create offense for him and his weakside shot blocking would be great.
So, here's the problem. The Rockets have little incentive to help Knicks win by giving them a fairly useful JJ unless something really valuable, like Randolph, is cominb back. The Knicks can't possibly justify to their fans (or to anyone else) trading a potential star like Randolph to get Jared Jeffries back. Can't see how the interests of the teams converge on this one. Perhaps the Knicks are offerring Turaif or Azubuike?
Any chance of gallinari? 3p shooting couple with shot blocking abilities. Thats something you can never have too much of.
Battier and Jeffries for Randolph and Curry. We decrease our payroll by 2 million. This is a trade that helps now and for the future. Randolph is better than Battier now, and while he doesn't know the system, his skill and athleticism will be nice off the bench. He gives us size and quickness and helps us match up against taller teams. Curry is a gamble himself. Often times, blockbuster trades revolve around one massive expiring contract, not multiple ones. Curry is a consolidated trade piece at the deadline. He is also harder to move in the event that we just want to get under the cap. That is what makes this an "all in" type trade: Let's say NO sucks this year and wants to trade with us. If we are okay with a trade of Battier, Jeffries, Brooks, and Hill for Paul and Posey... why not trade Curry, Hill, and Brooks instead. We essentially get Randolph, Paul, and Posey for the same price. This is if that trade is available. Yao, Miller, Hayes Scola, Randolph, Patterson Ariza, Posey Martin, Bud Paul, Lowry Nice mix of veterans (Yao, Miller, Scola) and young guys in the front-court (Randolph, Patterson, Ariza). A potent back-court in their prime. However, let's say we strike out at the trade deadline. Well we aren't going to be able to move Curry easily and could end up paying the lux tax for a look at Randolph.
I'm not sure I see trading Jeffries to the Knicks as having a heck of a lot of impact on their draft picks that we own. I like Jeffries just fine, but he's hardly a difference maker over the course of 82 games. If moving him facilitates further fleecing of these fools, fan-****ing-tastic.
